Cricket Australia’s second attempt to sell BBL clubs would give states freedom to choose fate of their own clubs
Can one member nation of Australian cricket tell the other what to do?
That’s the key question revolving around Cricket Australia’s revised plans (first raised by South Australia) to allow some states to sell Big Bash League clubs in time for the 2027-28 season, while others will wait and see.
In line with last week’s sacking of a CA employee over IT purchases worth more than $600,000 in purchase orders, the governing body is compiling details of a “self-determination model” for the sale of shares in BBL clubs.
State associations will essentially be allowed to do whatever they want, whenever they want, according to three senior Australian cricket sources who spoke on condition of anonymity while talks are ongoing. Sell now, in the future, or don’t sell at all.
Any shares sold will provide investors with a return on club profits, including a deduction for future broadcasting rights income, in proportion to the percentage of the club they purchase. Therefore, a 100 per cent sale of the Melbourne Renegades could be expected to generate much more cash than a 49 per cent sale of the Melbourne Stars.
Following the signing of the current domestic broadcasting rights arrangements with Foxtel and Seven in 2031, it is possible that BBL rights could be sold separately rather than as part of a collective agreement as has been the case since 2013.
There will be a “tax” of sorts to be paid in the future by states choosing to wait for greater certainty and higher club valuations rather than those selling in the here and now.
There will also be a separate BBL “commercial partnership” consisting of its own chief executive and a board made up of representatives of CA, state associations, as well as private investors.
The business entity will be formed as a “for-profit” vehicle that is eligible to pay tax in Australia. This would be a step away from its non-profit status, which is tightly held by CA and state associations, it would be better to funnel as much money as possible into the grassroots levels of the game.
Detailed versions of these plans are expected to be shared with state associations in June following International Cricket Council meetings in India around next weekend’s Indian Premier League final in Ahmedabad.
This point will say a lot about whether the warring parties have learned anything from the collapse of the original model of BBL club sales. This happened in April after NSW, Queensland and South Australia made several negative decisions on plans that had been in the works for several months by CA chief executive Todd Greenberg and his state colleagues.
Of course, if the process is to go any further, CA president Mike Baird will have to sit down with the provincial chiefs this time, as the real decision-making power on matters as wide-ranging as the sale of BBL clubs lies with each province’s boards.
The states this imprint speaks to argue that even if agreement is reached on fiscal issues, there are still important questions to be resolved regarding control and governance.
NSW, which has retained the services of Adara Group partner (and Melbourne Cricket Club vice-chairman) Christian Johnson as a consultant, is still seeking an audience with CA to discuss its “alternative strategy” for the game.
While Baird and CNSW president John Knox have spoken candidly on more than one occasion since the collapse of the previous sales model, there is little sign that Australian cricket’s biggest state association is in any mood to back down on its multiple reservations.
These are not limited to concerns about the money a potential sale would bring in, although that is an important issue.
There are also concerns about the transfer of future revenues in the game to outside investors, differing interpretations of future financial projections for domestic and ICC revenues, and additional queries regarding CA’s cost base. NSW questioned whether CA obtained fair value from its business activities, including product fees from betting companies.
In contrast, the CA took the view that the current national funding model, under which the provinces receive indexed annual distributions from Jolimont without reference to each province’s then-fiscal condition, should be reviewed to allow for greater ebb and flow depending on strategic imperatives.
But if the BBL 2.0 sales model moves from idea to reality, it will likely be because states that used the sovereignty argument to block the previous version of the sale will not be able to pull the same lever to prevent other states from making different choices.
Greenberg and several state CEOs traveled to Mumbai late last week to look at the financial strength of the game, following a BBL delegation’s visit to Chennai for talks on staging the first BBL game in India next summer.
Former Australian captain and former CA director Mark Taylor is not keen on the idea.
“I don’t really like it because if it happens, it will be early to mid-December when the Test matches start,” Taylor said. Wide World of Sports Sunday. Australia will face New Zealand in a four-Test series from December 9, so any such games will take away from the Test matches I love.
“It’s a bit of a trade-off thing. You’ll see two Big Bash teams going to India while the Australian cricket team is playing a Test series here in Australia.
“It’s really hard to find solutions, but I hope everyone comes together on this and thinks about what’s good for Australian cricket at the end of the day. Remember we need to produce the next generation of cricketers, not just those who are making good money today.”
News, results and expert analysis from the sports weekend delivered every Monday. Sign up for our sports newsletter.
Daniel Brettig is The Age’s chief cricket writer and the author of many books on cricket.Connect with: X.
